HomeMy WebLinkAboutHMP for MEP2013-00002 - HMP Habitat Managment Plan - 1/30/2013 RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 20B
426 W. CEDAR ST
SHINNERS
HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN
JANUARY 2013
ACFRA"r
Advanced Concepts in Environmental Regulatory Assistance
SHINNERS
HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN
iIMWI
PREPARED FOR:
MR.PAUL SHINNERS
110 NE PANTHER LAKE ROAD
BREMERTON,WA 98312
PREPARED BY:
ACERA"`
1409 7T"AVE SE
OLYMPIA WA 98501
(360)292-9639
MIKE LAYES
PROFESSIONAL WETLAND SCIENTIST
JANUARY 2013
ACERAr./C
C� :idvwx-ed Concepts in Fnvnnnmental Regulatory Assistance
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Scope of Services........................................................................................................................................1
1.2 Site Description...........................................................................................................................................1
1.3 Project Description.....................................................................................................................................2
2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND DOCUMENT REVIEW................................................................... 2
2.1 Aerial Photograph Review..........................................................................................................................2
2.2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's National Wetland Inventory Map.............................................................2
2.3 Soil Survey Information..............................................................................................................................2
2.4 Topographical Information.........................................................................................................................2
2.5 WA State Fish and Wildlife Database Review.............................................................................................3
2.6 WA State Department of Natural Resources Database Review.................................................................3
3 Site Assessment....................................................................................................................................4
3.1 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas Observations......................................................................4
3.2 Wildlife Observations.................................................................................................................................4
3.3 Flora Observations......................................................................................................................................5
4 FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AREAS........................................................................................ 6
4.1 FWHCA Buffer Establishment.....................................................................................................................6
5 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS.................................................................................................................. 7
5.1 Tree Thinning For Proposed View Corridor................................................................................................7
5.2 Small Storage Shed.....................................................................................................................................8
5.3 Dock............................................................................................................................................................8
6 MITIGATION PLAN................................................................................................................................ 8
6.1 Avoidance and Minimization Measures.....................................................................................................8
6.2 Best Management Practices.......................................................................................................................9
6.3 Compensation Measures......................................................................................................................... 10
7 PLANTING PLAN.................................................................................................................................. 10
7.1 Planting Schedule.................................................................................................................................... 10
7.2 Maintenance............................................................................................................................................ 12
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
i
8 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................................... 12
9 QUALIFICATIONS OF AUTHOR............................................................................................................ 12
TABLES
TABLE 1. PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES.....................................................................................................................3
TABLE2. WILDLIFE OBSERVATIONS................................................................................................................................4
TABLE3. PLANT SPECIES LIST.........................................................................................................................................5
TABLE 4. BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLANTS................................................................................................................... 11
APPENDIX A FIGURES
FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP
FIGURE 2 MASON COUNTY PARCEL/SITE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH MAP
FIGURE 3 USFWS NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAP
FIGURE 4 USGS 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP
FIGURE 5 WDFW PHS MAP
FIGURE 6 DNR WATER TYPE MAP
FIGURE 7 PROPOSED SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FIGURE 8 NATIVE PLANT INSTALLATION DIAGRAM
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
1 INTRODUCTION
ACERA LLC has completed a Habitat Management Plan (HMP) for proposed site development at Mason County
Parcel#123065001018(Site), located at 150 NE Panther Lake Road, Bremerton, Washington (Figure 1). The Site
is located within Section 06, Township 23N, Range 1W, Willamette Meridian. The center of the Site is at
Latitude 47931'08.13"N and Longitude 122951'19.08"W. Figures are provided in Appendix A.
Mike Layes, a Mason County Qualified Wildlife Biologist and Professional Wetland Scientist visited the Site and
performed the Habitat Assessment Study on December 14, 2012. The Site and accessible adjacent areas were
investigated for the presence of protected Fish and Wildlife Species and Habitat Conservation Areas(FWHCA).
1.1 SCOPE OF SERVICES
The scope of work for this study was limited to the following tasks:
A review of documents and maps readily available, including the Washington State Department of Fish and
Wildlife's Priority Habitat and Species(PHS) data base.
A property assessment to observe existing site conditions and identify fish and wildlife species and habitats
regulated under MCRO 17.01.110 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCA) and to identify
potential mitigation opportunities and management recommendations.
Delineation of any FWHCA identified during the property assessment. This includes the Ordinary High Water
Mark(OHWM)of any on-site streams, lakes,or marine water bodies.
Review federal, state, and local regulations and management recommendations pertaining to the FWHCA
identified during the site visit and document review activities. This includes applicable information from
Management Recommendations for Washington's Priority Habitats and Species.
A Habitat Management Plan detailing the proposed project, an analysis of perceived project impacts to
identified FWHCA,and mitigation and management actions intended to offset any such impacts to FWHCA.
1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION
The Site is situated on the south shore of Panther Lake and has 60 feet of low bank waterfront and
approximately 200 feet of road frontage.The Site is approximately 380 feet long measured from the shoreline of
Panther Lake to NE Panther Lake Road. Topography consists of a moderate to gentle slope at approximately
10% grade from NE Panther Lake road (550' Elevation) down to the shoreline of Panther Lake (500' Elevation).
The property is currently forested.
The Site is zoned Rural Residential 5 (RR5) and the shoreline is designated Urban Environment under Mason
County Shoreline Master Program. The shoreline of Panther Lake is heavily developed with single family
residences and several private docks. Most properties, both on the Kitsap and Mason County portions of the
lake have small shoreline setbacks and the majority of the property owners have mowed lawns or landscaping to
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
1
the water's edge. The adjacent parcel to the north is mostly forested, but does contain a terraced recreational
clearing of mowed lawn along the shoreline and a dock. The adjacent parcel to the south is developed with a
single family residence,associated landscaping, driveway,and out buildings.
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is to develop the Site with a three bedroom single family residence (SFR) approximately
3,500 square feet in size. In addition to the SFR, proposed development includes: a three bedroom septic
system; a driveway; a small trail to the shoreline; clearing of several trees for viewing purposes, a small dock;
and a small shed along the trail near the shoreline.
2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND DOCUMENT REVIEW
The preparation of this report included review of several existing sources of documentation, review of agency
databases and maps, and correspondence with resource agency staff. A field reconnaissance was conducted to
review habitat conditions and verify written documentation. The review of existing information includes, but
was not limited to,the following documents and information sources:
2.1 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH REVIEW
Google Earth (Imagery dated December 10, 2012) and the Mason County Geodata Viewer (orthophotos dated
2011) were accessed to review aerial imagery of the Site. According to these sources the Site is shown as
undeveloped and vegetated with coniferous forest(Figure 2).
2.2 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE'S NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAP
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) was queried to determine if previously
identified wetlands are present on or near the Site (USFWS 2012). According to the NWI Interactive Online
Mapper (Figure 3), several small Palustrine Scrub-Shrub, Broadleaf Deciduous, Seasonally Flooded Wetlands
(PSS1C) are mapped in the vicinity of Panther Lake. The closest NWI mapped wetland is approximately 0.15
miles northwest of the Site. County wetland buffers do not extend onto the Site.
2.3 SOIL SURVEY INFORMATION
According to The Natural Resource Conservation Service's (NRCS 1960) Soil Survey of Mason County,
Washington, native soils for the property and adjacent areas are mapped as Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam,5-
15 percent slopes(non-hydric well-drained).
2.4 TOPOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
The appropriate USGS 7.5 Minute Topographical Map was reviewed to determine the general drainage patterns
of the Site and surrounding landscape (Figure 4). The Topographical Map shows that the Site gently slopes
down northeast to Panther Lake. Water flows from Panther Lake into Panther Creek,then the Tahuya River,and
eventually Ruget-SowA.
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
2
2.5 WA STATE FISH AND WILDLIFE DATABASE REVIEW
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's (WDFW) Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) online database
was queried on December 11th, 2012 to determine if state or federally listed fish or wildlife species occur on or
within % mile of the Site (Figure 5). PHS information is summarized in Table 1. There are three mapped
Palustrine wetlands within % mile to the Site — the nearest being 1,315 feet from the property; A Northern
Spotted Owl Management Buffer is mapped approximately 2,450 feet to the northwest; Panther Creek is
located approximately 2,380 feet north of the Site — Panther Creek contains Coastal Resident Cutthroat Trout,
Coho Salmon. Panther Lake is not considered a priority habitat however the fish listed above utilizing the lake
are considered priority species. No special regulations extend onto this property because of proximity of
endangered,threatened or sensitive species.
TABLE 1. PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES
Scientific Name Common Name PRIORITY AREA Location
Oncorhynchus Breeding Area,
Coho Salmon Panther Creek
kisutch Occurrence
Oncorhynchus carki Coastal Resident Occurrence, Migration Panther Creek
Cutthroat Trout
I'
Strix occidentalis Northern Spotted Owl Management Buffer 2,450 feet northwest of Site
n/a n/a Palustrine wetlands 1,315 feet northwest of Site
2.6 WA STATE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DATABASE REVIEW
The Washington Department of Natural Resources' (WDNR) Natural Heritage Information System was queried to
determine if the Site occurs in a location reported to contain high quality natural heritage wetland occurrences
or occurrences of natural heritage features commonly associated with wetlands. According to WDNR data dated
August 24th, 2012,there are no records of rare plants or high quality native ecosystems occurring in the vicinity
of the Site.
The WDNR Forest Practices data base was consulted December 11th, 2012 to determine if water bodies occur
on or in the vicinity of the Site that are previously mapped and classified under the water typing system detailed
in WAC 222-16-030. According to the Water Type Map, Panther Lake is classified as a Water of the State (Type S
Water Body). The Site has 60 feet of waterfront on Panther Lake. Panther Lake is over 20 acres and is therefore
classified as FWHCA under MCRO 17.01.110.B.5.
In addition, a Type N Stream (non-fish bearing) flows into Panther Lake approximately 800 feet east of the Site.
Panther Creek begins approximately 2,380 feet from the Site on the north side of Panther Lake and is mapped as
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
3
Type F (fish bearing). These water bodies are not adjacent to the Site and their FWHCA buffers do not extend
onto the Site. A WDNR Forest Practices Water Type Map of the Site and vicinity is provided in Figure 6 in
Appendix A
3 SITE ASSESSMENT
The Site and accessible adjacent areas were investigated for the presence of protected Fish and Wildlife Species
and Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCA) listed under MCRO 17.01.110 by Mason County Qualified Wildlife
Biologist Mike Layes on December 14th, 2012.
3.1 FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS OBSERVATIONS
The Site was investigated for FWHCA from 9AM to 12PM on December 14th, 2012. As discussed in Section 2.6,
the Site has 60 feet of waterfront on Panther Lake. Panther Lake is over 20 acres and is therefore classified as
FWHCA under MCRO 17.01.110.B.5. No additional FWHCA were identified on or near the Site during the
investigation.
The Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of Panther Lake was determined during the site investigation based on
geomorphological and riparian vegetation characteristics. The OHWM was marked in the field using pink
surveyor's flagging numerically labeled "OHWM-#".
3.2 WILDLIFE OBSERVATIONS
Observations of all wildlife species, habitats, and sign were noted during field work activities. Table 2 below,
provides a summary of these observations. These observations are not intended to provide a complete
inventory, but a basic list of common wildlife species found at the Site.
TABLE 2. WILDLIFE OBSERVATIONS
BIRDS
Species(Common) Species(Scientific) Comments/Observations
Raven Corvus corax Heard calling
Steller's jay Cyanocitta stelleri Several seen and heard during visit
Song sparrow Melospiza melodia several heard singing
Black-capped chickadee Parus atricopillus Several foraging in trees
Downey woodpecker Picoides pubescens Observed on Douglas fir snag
Rufus-sided towhee Pipilo Observed and heard foraging in underbrush
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
4
erythrophthalmus
Winter wren Troglodytes troglodytes Observed calling and foraging in underbrush
MAMMALS
Species(Common) Species(Scientific) Comments/Observations
Douglas squirrel Tamiasciurus douglasii Heard calling
This listing represents the major wildlife species identified by ACERA in December 2012.
There may be other species present on the Site that are not listed.
3.3 FLORA OBSERVATIONS
Observations of all flora species and plant communities were noted during field work activities. The Site is
vegetated with native second growth forest with an overstory dominated by Douglas fir and Western red cedar
over a thick understory of evergreen huckleberry, salal and sword fern. Table 3 below, provides a summary of
these observations. These observations are not intended to provide a complete inventory, but a basic list of
common flora species found at the Site.
TABLE 3. PLANT SPECIES LIST
Common Name Scientific Name
TREES
Red alder Alnus rubra
Douglas fir Pseudotsugo menziesii
Western red cedar Thuja plicato
Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla
SHRUBS
Salal Gaultherio shallon
Oceanspray Holodiscus discolor
European holly llexaquifolium
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
5
Pacific rhododendron Rhododendron macrophyllum
Evergreen huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum
Red huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium
FORBS
Lady fern Athyrium filix femina
Sword fern Polystichum munitum
4 FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AREAS
Based on information gathered during background research and document review and observations made
during the site assessment conducted on December 14, 2012, Panther Lake is the only FWHCA regulated under
MCRO 17.01.110 that affects development of the Site. No additional FWHCA or any other regulated critical
areas identified in the MCRO were identified on or adjacent to the Site.
4.1 FWHCA BUFFER ESTABLISHMENT
The Site is an undeveloped lot. The adjacent parcel to the north is undeveloped; the adjacent parcels to the
south are developed with existing single family residences. According to MCRO 17.01.110.D.2, the Site
therefore meets the special provisions for FWHCA buffer establishment as detailed below:
2. The following are special provisions for buffers and setbacks on lots created prior to December 5, 1996, and
which are located on saltwater or on a freshwater lake 20 acres or larger in size. As stated in the Table 3, there
shall be a standard 100 foot buffer for a total of 100 feet as measured from the ordinary high water mark(OHWM).
Provided, however, that in the following circumstances, these special provisions apply instead of the standard
buffer and setback requirement.
2)Where an existing residence is on one side of and within 150 feet of the lot line of the subject lot,and no more
than 200 feet from the shoreline OHWM, the setback on the subject lot is determined by an imaginary common
line drawn from the shore-side roof line of the existing residence and across the subject lot to a point which is 100
feet from the OHWM along the far lot line of the subject lot.
The common line set back may be more or less than 100 feet from the OHWM, provided, however,that:
(a)the buffer shall not be less than 20 feet in width from the OHWM and a minimum setback from the edge of the
buffer is 15 feet;and
(b)there shall be a maximum buffer of 100 feet from the OHWM with the balance of the setback established by
the common line to be a building setback area.
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
6
II
(c) If the resulting buffer is less than 100 feet,it will be enhanced for wildlife function which will include at a
minimum planting with native vegetation.
(d) If the resulting buffer is less than 100 feet,the development of site outside the buffer shall also use best
management practices such as those in Appendix C to limit impacts to the resource.
According to Mason County Planning Staff, when more than one existing residence is located within 150 feet
and on one side of the proposed development,the common line building setback is established by averaging the
setbacks of these existing structures. In this case, two existing residences are within 150 feet south of the Site
with building setbacks of 20 and 144 feet. The parcels within 150 feet north of the Site are undeveloped and
therefore the standard 100 foot common line building setback applies. Due to the curvature of the shoreline,
these setbacks are averaged together to establish the common line building setback for the Site of 88 feet
measured from the OHWM of Panther Lake. The FWHCA protective vegetation buffer is therefore established at
73 feet based on the required 15 foot setback from the common line building setback. The area between the
common line building setback and the FWHCA protective vegetation buffer may be utilized for landscaping and
at grade patios(Figure 7).
5 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS
The proposed development activities addressed in this Habitat Management Plan involve the clearing of a view
corridor, construction of a small storage shed, and placement of a dock. Foreseeable project impacts to FWHCA
or their buffers include the following:
5.1 TREE THINNING FOR PROPOSED VIEW CORRIDOR
According to MCRO 17.01.110.F.4, falling of trees greater than 6 inches DBH and numbering greater than 15
percent of trees in the proposed FWHCA buffer requires a Mason Environmental Permit. The thinning and
removal of trees is consistent with the Site's Urban Environment designation within the Mason County Shoreline
Management Plan; allowing for optimum utilization of shorelines for residential use similar to the majority of
the established homes along Panther Lake.
The applicant proposes to create a thirty foot wide view corridor through the center of the Site from the
proposed SFR to the shoreline of Panther Lake. This will require the removal of 15 of the existing 29 Western
red cedars within the 73 foot FWHCA protective vegetation buffer. These trees range in size from 6 to 20 inches
diameter at breast height (DBH). Aside from the proposed view corridor and a primitive path from the SFR to
the shoreline, the remaining trees and native understory vegetation within the 73 foot protective vegetation
buffer will be preserved and enhanced. In addition, 15 feet of native vegetation will be preserved and enhanced
along each side property line setback of Site from the 73 foot protective vegetation buffer to the 88 foot
common line building setback
The proposed thinning of these trees may not necessarily be a negative impact. Due to the thick tree canopy,
understory vegetation is fairly sparse within the buffer area. Removal of trees will allow the understory to
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
7
thrive. The removal of trees will allow for more sun exposure and enhance the growth of remaining trees and
an understory. In addition,the remaining Western red cedars will have more room to grow to maturity.
5.2 SMALL STORAGE SHED
A small 64 square foot storage shed is proposed near the shoreline within the protective vegetation buffer
(Figure 7). Approximately 70 square feet of native vegetation will be removed to create a space for the shed.
5.3 DOCK
A Habitat Management Plan is not required for construction of fresh water dock by Mason County. However,
mitigation for dock construction may be required by WDFW. Therefore, the applicant will be proposing
additional mitigation measures within this Habitat Management Plan in order to meet any such WDFW
requirements.
The construction of a dock is proposed from the center of the property shoreline out into Panther Lake.
Detailed construction specifications for the dock are not available at this time. However, the dock design and
placement will meet all Mason County, WDFW, and ACOE requirements, BMPs, and work windows. The dock
will most likely utilize a modular float construction system with two small piles placed at the end for
stabilization. Temporary minimal impacts to water quality from pile placement will take place. In addition,
temporary noise impacts are likely during pile placement.
Dock placement is not likely to affect any PHS species. Panther Lake is stocked yearly with large numbers of
hatchery Rainbow Trout and has a resident population of Largemouth Bass. It is highly unlikely that listed PHS
species (Coastal Resident Cutthroat Trout, Coho Salmon)that are documented in Panther Creek are also present
in any significant numbers in Panther Lake. Spawning Coho are not likely to enter the lake and Cutthroat Trout
are likely out competed by Rainbow Trout or become pray for Largemouth Bass.
6 MITIGATION PLAN
The applicant proposes several measures to avoid, minimize, and compensate for proposed project impacts to
FWHCA and buffer areas. These measures are intended to maintain suitable habitat to support and sustain local
native wildlife species within their natural geographic distribution so isolated populations are not created by
fragmentation of habitats throughout the landscape. In addition,these measures are intended to preserve and
protect water quality and shoreline functions of adjacent waterbodies. Furthermore, several Best Management
Practices (BMPs) are proposed to avoid and minimize project impacts during construction activities and long
term residential use of the Site.
6.1 AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION MEASURES
Several measures were voluntarily incorporated into the project design to avoid and minimize impacts to native
forest areas and to water quality functions throughout the Site. The following measures are intended to
partially offset project impacts to native forest areas and water quality functions within the FWHCA buffer from
proposed view corridor clearing activities:
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
8
• Shared road access with the adjacent property to the south of Site. This will substantially reduce the
amount of driveway required to access the Site. It will avoid impacts to a significant number of native
trees and shrubs, preserving the native vegetation to the greatest extent possible.
• Shared water well with the adjacent property to the south of Site. This will avoid additional impacts to
native vegetation that would result from drilling a well on the Site and the construction of a well house.
• The proposed storage shed will be of minimal size.
• The proposed SFR will be setback at 100 feet from the OHWM which is 12 feet beyond the common line
building setback.
• An above grade deck is to be located between the SFR and the proposed 88 foot building setback. This
deck will use non-impervious construction techniques to minimize additional stormwater runoff into the
buffer.
• The area between the proposed 73 foot FWHCA protective vegetation buffer and the 88 foot building
setback will be cleared of some existing trees for the view corridor. However, native understory
vegetation will be left in a natural state to the greatest extent possible and/or landscaped using native
species.Within this setback area, native vegetation will be preserved with 15 of each side property line.
• The area west of the proposed SFR will be developed with a driveway and septic drain field. The
remainder will be left in a natural forested state to the greatest extent possible.
6.2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
The following Best Management Practices (BMPs) are proposed to avoid and minimize project impacts during
construction activities and long term residential use of the Site.
DURING CONSTRUCTION
• Clearly mark out FWHCA protective vegetation buffer areas to prevent impacts
• Install silt fencing around the work area to prevent erosion and siltation of adjacent water bodies
• Minimize amount of erodible soils at any given time to the maximum extent feasible.
• Check all equipment daily for leaks. Refueling and lubrication of equipment should in a designated area
away from adjacent water bodies and storm drains
• Do not apply any chemicals when there is a possibility of rain
LONG TERM RESIDENTIAL USE
• Control pets. Domestic animals can serve as predators against wildlife or damage critical plant species.
• All lighting on the lakeside of the home should be downward facing.
• Limit the use of herbicides or pesticides particularly near the areas of berry, fruit or mast producing
shrubs or trees. This will help ensure the availability of foraging for wildlife. Even fertilizing lawn can
degrade nutrients available to animals.
• Limit the use of insecticides. Insect populations are important on many ecological levels particularly as a
food source for insectivores.
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
9
6.3 COMPENSATION MEASURES
The applicant proposes a buffer enhancement plan and the removal of the existing pile of construction materials
and yard waste to compensate for project impacts resulting from the proposed shed construction, removal of 15
trees for view corridor clearing activities, and construction of a small dock. The overall goal of the buffer
enhancement plan is to increase the wildlife habitat and water quality improvement functions within the
FWHCA protective vegetation buffer. This will be accomplished through the planting of native shrubs and
ground cover as detailed the planting plan.
7 PLANTING PLAN
Existing vegetation within the proposed FWHCA 73 foot protective vegetation buffer is dominated by a plant
community that is generally low in species diversity. It consists of a second growth stand made up entirely of
Western red cedars averaging approximately 20 inches DBH,over an understory of salal, evergreen huckleberry,
and sword fern. Overall, the understory is sparse, but denser along the shoreline and near the north and south
property boundaries as a result of the existing clearings on adjacent parcels.
This planting plan is intended to increase plant species diversity which will increase nesting, forage, cover, and
pray opportunities for local native wildlife within the buffer and increased invertebrate pray production for fish
species within Panther Lake. In addition, this planting plan will increase the overall density of the understory
which will result in improved water quality enhancement functions such as stormwater runoff attenuation and
infiltration.
No additional tree plantings are proposed within FWHCA 73 foot protective vegetation buffer. As discussed
above, a dense even-aged, pure stand of Western red cedar exists within the buffer. In the native lowland
forests of Pacific Northwest,this species is a very long lived climax forest community dominant. At their current
density, these trees don't have enough room to reach maturity. Therefore, it makes no sense ecologically to
plant additional trees in the understory.
7.1 PLANTING SCHEDULE
All plant materials will be native to the northwest, and preferably the Puget Sound Region. Plant materials will
be propagated from native stock; no cultivars or horticultural varieties will be allowed. All plants shall be high
quality restoration grade vigorous stock. It may be necessary to acquire plant material through several nurseries
and some species may be unavailable. See Table 4 for a complete list of plant species and quantities. ACERA
recommends the following licensed regional nurseries for procurement of native plants.
• Black Lake Organic Nursery, Olympia,WA (360)786-0537
• Bog foot Environmental, Olympia,WA (360)866-7068
• Inside Passage, Port Townsend, WA (360)385-6114
• Sound Native Plants,Olympia,WA (360)352-4122
• Watershed Garden Works, Longview,WA (360)423-6456
• Woodbrook Nursery,Gig Harbor,WA (253)265-6271
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
10
The proposed FWHCA 73 foot protective vegetation buffer is approximately 5,600 square feet. Enhancement
plantings will be inter-planted within the existing buffer vegetation as space allows. Plant species have been
selected that are adapted to grow within the buffer area based on moisture tolerances, habitat adaption, and
the desired plant community. The landscape contractor/applicant shall make a good faith effort to secure all
species specified in this plan.
TABLE 4. BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLANTS
SCIENTIFIC COMMON
NAME NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING QUANTITY
Shrubs
Ribes Red-flowering 1-gallon Container/ Clumps of 5, 10
sanguineum Currant g bare root 1-1%foot O/C
Mahonia Tall Oregon 1-gallon Container/ Clumps of 5, 10
aquifolium Grape g bare root 1-1%foot O/C
Philadelphus Container/ Clumps of 5,
Mock orange 1-gallon 10
lewisii bare root 1-1%foot O/C
Amelanchier Container/ Clumps of 5,
Serviceberry 1-gallon 10
alnifolia bare root 1-1%foot O/C
Symphoricarpos Container/ Clumps of 5,
Snowberry 1-gallon 10
albus bare root 1-1%foot O/C
Rosa nutkana Nootka rose 1-gallon Container/ Clumps of 5, 10
bare root 1-1%foot O/C
Ground Cover
Arctostaphylos 4" to 1- Clumps of 4,
Kinnikinnick container 20
uva-ursi gallon 1 foot O/C
Mahonia Dull Oregon 4" to 1- Clumps of 4,
nervosa Grape container 20
p gallon 1 foot O/C
Planting will occur after clearing and grading of the Site for the SFR, clearing of the area to construct the shed,
and the proposed thinning and removal trees for the view corridor. It is recommended that planting occur
during winter dormancy. Site conditions permitting, the optimum time for planting most native woody plant
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
11
material appears to be the later part of winter and early spring (February-March). Planting instructions are
provided in Figure 8.
7.2 MAINTENANCE
Maintenance shall consist of irrigation and replacement of dead or dying plants with appropriate vegetation
specified in the planting plan. Selective pruning of existing salal and evergreen huckleberry may be necessary to
allow the buffer enhancement plantings to establish. Irrigation of native plantings is recommended twice
monthly during May 15th—October 15th of the first two years.
8 CONCLUSION
Based on background research and a site investigation, Panther Lake is the only FWHCA regulated under MCRO
17.01.110 that affects development of the Site. No additional FWHCA or any other regulated critical areas
identified in the MCRO were identified on or adjacent to the Site. The proposed development activities
addressed in this Habitat Management Plan involve clearing of a view corridor, construction of a small storage
shed, and placement of a dock. The construction of a small shed will result in an additional loss of 70 square
feet of native vegetation. Removal of 15 trees for a view corridor will likely have a positive effect on the existing
understory native vegetation and remaining trees within the buffer. Project design includes impact avoidance
and minimization measures, Best Management Practices (BMP's), and compensatory measures (buffer
enhancement plantings) to mitigate for construction impacts on site. These proposed mitigation measures
offset the project impacts to FWHCA and buffers that are on or resent adjacent to the Site.
P J
The findings and conclusions documented in this report have been prepared for specific application to this
project. They have been developed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill normally exercised by
members of the environmental science profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the area. Our
work was also performed in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in our proposal. The
conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are professional opinions based on an interpretation
of information currently available to us and are made within the operation scope, budget, and schedule of this
project. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. In addition, changes in government codes, regulations, or
laws may occur. Because of such changes, our observations and conclusions applicable to this Site may need to
be revised wholly or in part.
9 QUALIFICATIONS OF AUTHOR
Mike Layes is a Wildlife Biologist with 17 years professional experience. He is also a Professional Wetland
Scientist (#2157) certified through the Society of Wetland Scientists. Mr. Layes has extensive training and
experience in wetland science, aquatic habitat restoration and mitigation project design, wetland delineation,
stream assessments, fishery survey techniques, ordinary high water mark (OHWM) determinations, near-shore
marine habitat assessments, eelgrass bed delineation, aquatic ecology, and threatened and endangered species
survey and monitoring techniques, and environmental permitting.
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
12
Mr. Layes earned a Bachelor of Science Degree in Wildlife Biology/Forest Ecology from The Evergreen State
College in 1995. He has previously worked as a wildlife biologist for several Federal and State agencies and
Universities throughout his career on a wide range of projects dealing with threatened and endangered species
and their habitats. Mr. Layes' experience in both wetland and wildlife science gives him the ability to prepare
combined wetland and fish and wildlife habitat assessments as needed for any given project.
Mr. Layes is an experienced SCUBA diver with over 200 logged dives. He conducts underwater field work for
fisheries surveys, shoreline, outfall, marina and shellfish farm development and restoration projects. He also has
extensive experience with the surveying and removal of invasive aquatic plants in lakes and rivers.
4
M
Mike Layes, PWS
117.001 Shinners ACERA
Habitat Management Plan January 2013
13
APPENDIX A
CAN G�
ismFIGURE 1 r'o
JD
i
�crtek"`"f °`Ap
IN a g
Ica
paw°`
Prnther I ;
w
or
40. •J tak4 Vk
,pa �ratlo Aa� =
NE beer creek�
� - =
hn Fid-
� 5
d
^Gaek O ' t NE Boawvl
Ae-
Lourol Rd,'
x. ►�E Osly[3
tWl
???Ilya
*41
I
t.
Mason County Map Output Page Page 1 of 1
FIGURE
Mason County Map
0 ~ 21 f�r.
z. � .�12SOG`,.QJ1J2J
r _• ."+` 1
D • ~ b,
,A
y�. A ..-tJ- �♦' ��•jtb ce,00rrtc+n r � �+'y•. �'� ,'1
..�L '��K nr j`,�1;, .i- � � �`� �:- •y t..o,:scetnra
71
..- t. )k 7r F" r i3ar,earyc,.t
1210600s0000' 0101-
P <�
s-A
"11. ,r s. ti. .« -. r" ry 7r'�ri�I .., r1-G� �A � [•N� r
.. i. �f, 'y 1710912c, 10},
DISCLAIMER AND("IMITATION OI;LIABILITY:
The data used to make this map have been tested for accuracy,and every effort has been LEGEND
made to ensure that these data are timely,accurate and reliable.However,Mason County
makes no guarantee or warranty to its accuracy as to labeling,dimensions,or placement or K cads tq p*0aral Lands
location of any map features contained herein.The boundaries depicted by these data are
approximate,and are not necessarily accurate to surveying or engineering standards,and are �V Higtrrrays City of Shoftn
intended for informational purposes only.Mason County does not assume any legal liability
or responsibility arising from the use of this map in a manner not intended by Mason County. ti Rwws 8 Str#ams [� County Swridery IONA)
In no event shall Mason County be liable for direct,indirect,incidental,consequential,
special,or tort damages of any kind,including,but not limited to,loss of anticipated profits parcels * Commlmomf DMrlcts
or benefits arising from use of or reliance on the information contained herein
r f 1 Sections '� Lakes
tea:
®2009-Mason County GIs ,�"f Tammsfips S pugel round d MaW LAMS
loo W.Public Works Dr t._!
Shelton,WA 98584
http://mapmason.co.m ason.wa.us/serviet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=amason... 12/8/2012
FIGURE
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Shinners HMP
i1W 16 N ti.ID.tt'Y:
V KF'K'F:
National Wetlands Inventor
•..w ,
Dec 11,2012
�r Wetlands
1-83C11 Freshwater Emergent
Freshwater ForestedfShrub
,.1
_ Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marne
_ Freshwater Pond
- Lake
Riverine
i
Other
I
rjr
r
_ K1I,,
I E
loon ft
This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not
c
responsible for the accuracy o currentness of the base data shown on this map.All
wetlands related data should be used In accordance with the layer metadata found on
the Wetlands Mapper web site.
User Remarks:
111 111 111 1 111 111
.l / lit y .�Ya;JE• r� Li Ili i .�`'�''` 1 r t,� a e � �
... .+ i ,�1 .ti ..� � /j ! ���:�� 1,I . 1'%�/.�i`■�ic�
r r I I j � I � 1�;I';•',
mp"J VW
FRA
010
.� - '. TO�PO♦h±� 1 / o -.o .o Q 11 _ _ II J aJ,///� i'1 �ll'1//1��..�t.�/.: � �SUP
111 111 19111DA 1 111 111
,
FIGURE
-SOKw M Ny�yl P+%Vo"+M\MOON �
YMOMOWnOO MO Melt Ottu'►tM W—W SKOp.a T-00
ah r
b e
7eter�.
SITES N!:t3eA(
r�'cr
Map Output Page 1 of 1
FIGURE
F❑RI lST PRAT-T®❑ ❑AS❑ MAP
00000010 ❑R❑❑®❑CFI ;LiGEI9 7: E❑❑® ®®❑[F=E❑❑I❑❑®
h
M1 1
8015 8 801508 U 1801600 180tI
1
$ 92
: j
+80 88 +80188 +800 117682
C
1;
a Panther Lake
I
{8 588 180 68 1800660 1800882
1
� 'I❑E e
II
❑00=
http://fortress.wa.gov/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=fpars&CiientVersi... 12/11/2012
FIGURE
SHINNER HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN
JANUARY 17,2013
PROPOSED DOCK
yk! PANTHER LAKE PROPOSED 30'WIDE
50' VIEW CORRIDOR
Y SCALE r off r W 0-
1 /f
1
1 � _
PROPOSED
8'X 8' SHED
FNHCA BUFFER i �.� V BUFFER \�EXISTI G SFR
ADDITIONAL pp yr ENHANCEMENT
RETAINED ` O` �. , PLANTINGS
NATIVE PORES
COMMON LINE Y
BUILDING ADDITIONAL \
r RETAINED NATIVE
SETBACK ECK
.L LL FOREST \
PROPOSED SFR
EXISTING TWO
76� PARTY WELL
�r )SEPTIC
0 EXISTING SFR
PROPOSED
J DRIVEWAY
f ' `
MC PARCEL# 12306-50-01018
1.1 ACRES
EXISTI G DRIVEWAY
RETAINED NATIVE
DRAINFIELD
FOREST
RESERVE
150 NE PANTHER
1•
SLOPE PLANTING DETAILNOT TO SCXCr
FIGURE '
NOTES:
OLOCATER LATH (IF SPECIFIED)
°EXCAVATE APPROX. 2' DIA. WELL FOR
PLANTING
°FEATHER EXCESS � J"
SOIL CREATE DOWN SLOPE WATER BASIN BERM V
°SLOPE RELIEF (2:1 SHOWN, 1.5:1 MAX.) Ak
03" DEPTH OF MEDIUM HEM/FIR BARK (IF SPECIFIED
MULCH OVER SAUCER SLOPPING INTO BANK f 1 Ir
HOLD MULCH 3' FROM STEM I
P
°SOD STRIPPED AWAY FROM MULCH/WELL �— —
OT PLANTING OiL BALL ME SCARIFIED AND WORKED
INTO
= T I Ir:-i77_11-L
°BARE—ROOT SIMILAR; EXCAVATE TO FULL DEPTH
OF ROOT MASS AND CANOPY DIAMETER. SPREAD
ROOTS TO FULL WIDTH OF CANOPY.
WATER IMMEDIATELY AFTER INSTALLATION
TREE & SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
LOCATOR LATH (IF SPECIFIED)
APPROXIMATELY 3" DEEP LAYER OF MULCH(IF SPECIFIED)
APPROXIMATELY 1;" DIAMETER AROUND BASE OF PLANT
HOLD BACK 2"-3 FROM STEM
FEATHER EXCESS
SOIL CREATE CONTINUOUS
NOTES: WATER BASIN BERM
o PLANT SHRUBS IN GROUPS
OF 3 TO 5 OF SAME SPECIES
AT SPACING SPECIFIED IN PLAN
o REMOVE CONTAINER & WORK ROOTS
FREE OF SOIL; SPREAD ROOTS INTO
EXCAVATION
o BACKFILL TO BE SETTLED USING , v
WATER ONLY '
o EXCAVATE TREE PIT AT A MIN. OF 4 TIMES \� �\
DIA. OF ROOTBALL AT BALL CENTER, TAPERING PIT
GRADE TO FINISH GRADE
o W• ATEEER IMMEDIATELY AFETER INSTALLATIOLN Ep
OFRROCTT MASS IAND' CANOPYT DIAMETER SPREAD
ROOTS TO FULL WIDTH OF CANOPY.
WATER IMMEDIATELY AFTER INSTALLATION